Most Americans spend more time researching a car purchase than they spend reading their health insurance policy. Then a specialist visit happens, or a surgery, or a diagnosis that requires ongoing treatment, and the gap between what people assumed the system would do for them and what it actually does becomes impossible to ignore. Decision-making power in American healthcare has drifted steadily away from patients over the past two decades, not through any single dramatic event but through dozens of overlapping shifts in how care is financed, delivered, and administered.
These are the twelve ways that shift has happened.
1. Prior Authorization Has Turned Into a Waiting Game You Didn’t Know You Were Playing
A 2026 KFF analysis found that nearly 53 million prior authorization requests were submitted to Medicare Advantage insurers in 2024, of which 4.1 million (7.7%) were denied. Prior authorization is the requirement that your insurer approves a treatment before you receive it. In theory, it’s a check on unnecessary care. In practice, it’s become one of the most reliable ways the system delays treatment without technically refusing it.
Six in ten insured adults who needed specialized care reported they were required to get prior authorization for a service, treatment, or medication in the past two years. More than half of that group say their insurance delayed or denied their treatment. Though only a small share of denials are ever appealed, more than 80% of those appeals (80.7% in 2024) were partially or fully overturned. Across all years examined, more than eight in ten appeals overturned the initial denial. Which means the original denial was, in most cases, wrong. But you had to know to appeal, have the energy to do it, and wait through the delay regardless.
Prior authorization denial rates have been rising steadily, from 5.6% in 2020 to 7.7% in 2024. Total prior authorization volume has grown 42% since 2019, meaning insurers are requiring it for more services and denying them more often.
2. AI Is Now Rejecting Your Care Requests Without a Human Ever Looking at Them
Emerging evidence shows that insurers use automated decision-making systems to create systematic batch denials with little or no human review, placing barriers between patients and necessary medical care. The use of artificial intelligence in prior authorization has accelerated sharply, and the results are raising serious alarm.
In a 2024 survey, 61% of physicians expressed concern that AI either increases or will increase prior authorization denial rates. AI tools have been accused of producing denial rates up to 16 times higher in some cases. A 2024 Senate subcommittee report found that UnitedHealth and Humana are facing lawsuits alleging they used AI algorithms to wrongfully deny care to Medicare Advantage members, with investigators documenting that algorithmic tools were deployed in ways that increased denials.
In 2025, the federal government declined to implement rules regulating the use of AI in prior authorization. States have begun stepping in: California implemented regulations prohibiting insurers from using AI alone to make coverage decisions. That leaves most patients in most states with no protection from a system where an algorithm, rather than a physician, may be deciding whether their prescribed treatment gets approved.
3. Hospital Consolidation Has Eliminated the Competition That Once Kept Prices in Check
A 2025 report from the GAO found that physician practices have increasingly been acquired by hospital systems, insurance companies, private equity firms, and other entities. At least 47% of physicians were consolidated with hospital systems in 2024, up from less than 30% in 2012. This consolidation raises spending and prices, with one study finding significant increases for office visits occurring in hospital settings. Care quality may be the same or lower after consolidation occurs.
When a hospital system absorbs competing practices, patients lose the option to go elsewhere. Prices then follow. An ultrasound in a doctor’s office costs $164 on average, compared to $339 when provided in a hospital setting. Just seeing a doctor costs $118 in an independent physician’s office compared to $186 in a hospital, and for many Americans, the hospital is the only option available.
Just one or two health systems controlled the entire market for inpatient hospital care in 47% of U.S. metropolitan areas in 2024. When there’s only one hospital in your area, you don’t negotiate. You pay what they charge.
4. Private Equity Ownership of Medical Practices Is Prioritizing Returns Over Relationships
A study examining private equity acquisitions in dermatology, gastroenterology, and ophthalmology between 2016 and 2020 found that PE-acquired practices increased prices paid by commercial payers by 11% and chargemaster prices by 20%. Private equity ownership of physician practices remains a relatively small but fast-growing slice of the market, and its effects on patients are becoming increasingly documented.
Private equity ownership of or investment in physician practices represented about 6.5% of physicians nationally in 2024, but that share varied significantly by specialty and geographic market. In radiology, the shift has been particularly steep. PE ownership of radiology practices grew rapidly, with 12% of all radiologists working in PE-owned practices by 2023, up from just 1% in 2013.
Appointment times get shorter. Staff turnover rises. Billing intensifies. What was once a local practice with decades of patient relationships becomes an asset in a portfolio, optimized for throughput. The doctor you knew may still be there, but who they answer to has changed entirely.
5. Insurance Narrow Networks Are Blocking Access to the Doctors Patients Want
Health insurers offer cheaper premiums in exchange for limiting the pool of doctors you can see, a structure known as a narrow network. The problem is that patients often discover the full extent of those limits only when they actually need care. A specialist they’ve seen for years is suddenly out of network. A hospital is covered, but the surgeon who operates there is not.
Many Americans who have health insurance still cannot get the care they need because of costs or because they do not have access to the providers they need in their communities, according to the Commonwealth Fund. This is not simply a problem of rural geography. Narrow networks create access gaps in suburban and urban areas too, particularly for mental health, specialty care, and cancer treatment. Finding an in-network therapist who is actually accepting patients has become a near-universal frustration.
Patients chose the plan, often during a brief open enrollment window when the full network list wasn’t something they had time to audit. By the time they discover a provider is out of network, the treatment has often already happened.
6. The Rise of High-Deductible Plans Means Patients Are Self-Rationing Care
High-deductible health plans (policies with lower premiums but deductibles that can reach $8,000 or more per year before coverage kicks in) have become the dominant structure of American employer-sponsored insurance. They were designed to make patients more “cost-conscious.” In practice, they’ve made people skip care.
Patients enrolled in high-deductible plans consistently delay or avoid getting screened, filling prescriptions, or following up on symptoms because the out-of-pocket cost in the first months of a plan year is effectively the full price of care. The logic of “I’ll deal with it when I have to” takes over, and in healthcare that often means things get more expensive, not less, by the time someone finally seeks help.
New-to-brand prescription abandonment rates have hit 35% to 40%, a figure the pharmaceutical industry tracks closely because it represents revenue lost. But what it also represents is patients who were prescribed a medication, filled it once, saw what it cost, and stopped. No one follows up. No one tracks what happened clinically.
7. The Healthcare System Patient Power Deficit Is Clearest in the Exam Room
An AMA survey of 1,000 physicians in late 2024 found that on average, practices complete 39 prior authorization requests per physician per week. Physicians and their staff spend an average of 13 hours completing those requests each week. Forty percent of physicians have staff who work exclusively on prior authorizations. And 89% of physicians said prior authorization somewhat or significantly increases physician burnout.
Burnout is not an abstract institutional problem. It has direct consequences for the patient in the exam room. A physician who has spent the first two hours of their day on hold with insurers, appealing denials and documenting requirements, is not at their best by the afternoon. More than 100,000 nurses left the profession between 2019 and 2022. Primary care practices in rural and low-income areas are closing. The doctor you do get to see often has 15 minutes and a backlog of messages waiting.
The prior authorization process costs physicians time and resources that could be better dedicated to patient care, the AMA has found. That time cost has a direct clinical consequence: your doctor is not entirely present in the room with you, because the system is pulling them in nine other directions.
8. Consolidation Has Handed Profit Motive Control Over Institutions That Were Once Nonprofit
Healthcare in this country is increasingly prioritizing revenue and profits over patients. The killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in late 2024 triggered a torrent of public outrage about the business-as-usual practices of health insurers that can result in delayed or denied care, with financial and sometimes life-and-death consequences.
The collapse of Steward Health Care was a widely cited case study of private equity’s extraction of financial value at the expense of quality, safety, and patient care, destabilizing care for patients in multiple states and drawing a bipartisan coalition of congressional criticism.
Research reviewed by the GAO found that consolidation of large health systems does not consistently yield improvements in quality, safety, or cost control. Yet it continues, partly because the financial incentives for the buyers are strong, and partly because antitrust enforcement has been almost entirely absent. Of 1,164 mergers among the nation’s approximately 5,000 acute-care hospitals that occurred from 2000 to 2020, the Federal Trade Commission challenged only 13, an enforcement rate of about 1%.
9. Medical Billing Complexity Functions as a Tax on the Sick
A patient who receives serious care often receives not one bill but several: one from the hospital, one from the surgeon, one from the anesthesiologist, sometimes one from the radiologist who read an image they never personally met. These bills arrive weeks or months apart, rarely agree with the insurer’s explanation of benefits, and include codes that require a professional to interpret. Contesting any one of them takes hours.
This complexity advantages the institutions doing the billing. The patient either pays what’s asked, spends weeks on hold trying to decipher what they actually owe, or gives up and ignores it, which then affects their credit. The initial denial rate on insurance claims in 2024 increased 2.4% to 11.81%, meaning more than 1 in 10 claims submitted by providers were initially rejected, generating paperwork and appeals that patients often have to monitor from the sidelines without training to do so.
The No Surprises Act of 2022 was designed to protect patients from the most egregious surprise billing, but implementation has been slow and litigation from medical providers has limited its scope. Knowing you’re protected by law and being able to actually enforce that protection are two different things.
10. Pharmacy Benefit Managers Are Making Drug Access Decisions Nobody Elected Them to Make
Pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) are the middlemen between drug manufacturers, insurers, and pharmacies. They decide which drugs appear on formularies (the list of medications your plan will cover), negotiate rebates with manufacturers, and determine which pharmacy you can use. They are largely invisible to patients and enormously powerful.
Major PBMs including CVS Caremark, Express Scripts, and OptumRx have been expanding formulary exclusion lists, meaning more drugs are being moved to tiers that patients pay more for, or removed from coverage entirely. When a medication is excluded from your plan’s formulary, your doctor’s prescription becomes essentially a suggestion. You can appeal, seek a prior authorization, or pay full price.
Three companies (CVS Caremark, Express Scripts, and OptumRx) control an estimated 80% of the U.S. prescription drug market. That level of concentration means the negotiating decisions made in corporate boardrooms have direct consequences for whether a patient on a fixed income can afford their monthly medication. Most patients have no idea these companies exist, much less that they’re shaping what gets covered.
11. Mental Health Parity Laws Exist, but Enforcement Has Been Spotty
The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act has been federal law since 2008, requiring that insurance plans cover mental health and substance use disorder treatment at the same level as physical healthcare. Insurers, for the most part, have not complied in the way the law intended, and enforcement has been too slow and too narrow to fix it.
Only 55% of psychiatrists accept private insurance, compared to 89% of other healthcare providers, largely because reimbursement rates for mental health professionals are so much lower. That gap is both a symptom and a cause. When insurers reimburse mental health providers at rates too low to sustain a practice, providers stop accepting insurance. When providers stop accepting insurance, patients either pay out of pocket, go without care, or end up in emergency rooms with crises that primary care could have caught earlier.
The conditions with the highest stakes for timely access are the ones most consistently blocked by administrative hurdles. Prior authorization delays fall disproportionately on psychiatry, behavioral health, and substance use treatment, according to research published in peer-reviewed literature.
12. Medicaid Cuts Are Removing Coverage From Working Adults Who Have No Alternative
Plans like New York’s Essential Plan, a taxpayer-subsidized program established under the Affordable Care Act for people who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford private insurance, had used ACA tax credits to offer extremely low-cost coverage to more than a million New Yorkers. Those earning 200% to 250% of the federal poverty level are now losing that coverage.
Of the approximately nine million members expected to disenroll from Medicaid nationally, about six million are already employed either part or full time. That is not an abstraction about government budgets. It means people who go to work every day, who don’t qualify for public assistance in the traditional sense, who fall into the gap between poverty-level Medicaid and affordable private insurance are being dropped, and the safety net below them has been cut.
When patients can’t pay, hospitals absorb the costs and pass them onto people with insurance by increasing prices. Coverage losses don’t just affect the uninsured. They eventually raise costs for everyone still holding a plan.
Read More: The 10 Foods That Do the Most Damage as You Get Older
What to Do With All of This
Understanding the structural problems is not the same as feeling powerless inside them. The prior authorization data makes this unexpectedly clear: the vast majority of appeals succeed. The system counts on patients not knowing that, or not having the time and resilience to file them. Ask for the denial in writing. Ask for the specific clinical criteria that weren’t met. Ask for a peer-to-peer review, where your doctor argues the case directly to a physician at the insurer. Keep every document. Learn the timeline for appeals your plan is legally required to follow. None of this should be necessary for someone who is sick. The fact that it is says something clear about how far the healthcare system patient power dynamic has shifted from where it ought to be.
Some of these structural changes go back decades. The consolidation wave, the growth of prior authorization, the rise of PBMs, the high-deductible plan shift: none of these happened overnight, and they won’t be reversed quickly. But naming them accurately is where pressure for change starts. The first thing the system benefits from is patients assuming this is just how healthcare works everywhere and for everyone. It isn’t. Knowing that is where any real pushback begins.
Disclaimer: This information is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment and is for information only. Always seek the advice of your physician or another qualified health provider with any questions about your medical condition and/or current medication. Do not disregard professional medical advice or delay seeking advice or treatment because of something you have read here.
AI Disclaimer: This article was created with the assistance of AI tools and reviewed by a human editor.